originally posted by: diggindirt
The witnesses (on the links I saw) all agreed that he had his hands up and was simply walking toward the cop. Nobody mentioned that he was acting
aggressively. Or did I just blank that out?

I already quoted the witness saying exactly that, and the cop seemed to think he had no choice after the man wouldn't stop. So yes, they did.

So, in today's cops' world, walking toward someone with one's hand raised over one's head, from which blood is pouring, is an aggressive act worth of
instant execution.
He was "walking" toward the cop. All the witnesses said "walking" not charging or running at, or anything that would suggest aggression. Where does
it say in the law that a cop can't back off and wait for help if he feels threatened rather than taking a life?
I say give that cop a drug test. Let's see what he's been ingesting that made him so paranoid.

If the kid was "walking toward the cop" and being totally non-aggressive, why did the officer tase him repeatedly (with no effect) and use his baton
on him (with no effect) before resorting to a sidearm?

I have no earthy idea why the cop did those things. It is not a normal reaction to a bloodied person, even a person assumed to be intoxicated who
has just fallen from a second story window. That's why I want to know what on earth was in that cop's system that would make him shoot that poor
guy.

At some point the rest of the story will come out.

The male witness said "he was being very aggressive and going after the cop." The female witness says "I think 10 people from the neighborhood could
have held him down and got him some help."

Clearly he was not simply walking up to the cop to ask for help if the woman says it would take TEN PEOPLE to hold him down.

Is the PD not offering an emotional response?
They are covering their ass IMO, they need to do all they can to justify the shooting.
ETA: A little biased I know, just saying that generally they are going to say what needs to be said to justify and be creative about it.

I agree they might not have seen everything, just saying what I saw.

Police do in fact lie, case in point: Walter Scott.

If it wasn't for the video, we would have never known and the PD would have backed it.

If a US Marshal from 1880 encountered an idiot on PCP during that time period, would they shoot them or beat them? My bet is they'd beat them into
submission. It makes one wonder... were the peace keepers from the wild west made of sterner stuff than today's law enforcements.
Why would you guess that? I would say people from the era of gun fights in the street would shoot someone.

So you know that because of all the Westerns you've watched? The ones where they walk up to a drunk with a gun and just smack em on the head with the
butt of their pistol and drag them off to the jail cell to sober up?

If a US Marshal from 1880 encountered an idiot on PCP during that time period, would they shoot them or beat them? My bet is they'd beat them into
submission. It makes one wonder... were the peace keepers from the wild west made of sterner stuff than today's law enforcements.
Why would you guess that? I would say people from the era of gun fights in the street would shoot someone.

So you know that because of all the Westerns you've watched? The ones where they walk up to a drunk with a gun and just smack em on the head with the
butt of their pistol and drag them off to the jail cell to sober up?

Please...

It would seem to me that their moral responsibility would help them differentiate between the armed and unarmed.

It has nothing to do with Hollywood. More to do with factual evidence of research and moral aptitude.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Love how this kid is now high on PCP at the time...

But we are the ones jumping to conclusions...

Yes, and they know this because the neighbor reported that he had jumped through the glass. There is no concept that he might have fallen or been
pushed through said opening, something the neighbor failed to notice.
Anyone who is a witness who upholds the story is automatically accepted and the worst case is automatically assumed, therefore because the neighbor
said he jumped, that suddenly becomes "evidence" to show that he was on hard drugs.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Love how this kid is now high on PCP at the time...

But we are the ones jumping to conclusions...

Yes, and they know this because the neighbor reported that he had jumped through the glass. There is no concept that he might have fallen or been
pushed through said opening, something the neighbor failed to notice.
Anyone who is a witness who upholds the story is automatically accepted and the worst case is automatically assumed, therefore because the neighbor
said he jumped, that suddenly becomes "evidence" to show that he was on hard drugs.

Even still, the fact of the matter is that the current situation isn't known by law enforcement. So long as the man is unarmed, and the officers have
backup on scene, there is no excuse in the world for firing on an unarmed individual.

originally posted by: diggindirt
You're not seriously saying that a tv reporter saying someone was on drugs is evidence?

Him jumping through the window and the taser having no effect is evidence of a hardcore drug such as pcp. Why are you cop haters ignoring every part
of the story you don't like?

How do you know that he jumped through the window.?
Do you know with 100% certainty that the tazer was in full, working order?

I see no actual evidence that he jumped out the window. I don't see a lot of real evidence at all except the bullet-riddled corpse of a young man.

Since you declined to answer my question from an earlier post I will ask again: If that young man were your son would have preferred that he just
blast away or would you have liked the outcome better if he had waited for backup or simply swatted him with the baton?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Love how this kid is now high on PCP at the time...

But we are the ones jumping to conclusions...

Yes, and they know this because the neighbor reported that he had jumped through the glass. There is no concept that he might have fallen or been
pushed through said opening, something the neighbor failed to notice.
Anyone who is a witness who upholds the story is automatically accepted and the worst case is automatically assumed, therefore because the neighbor
said he jumped, that suddenly becomes "evidence" to show that he was on hard drugs.

Even still, the fact of the matter is that the current situation isn't known by law enforcement. So long as the man is unarmed, and the officers have
backup on scene, there is no excuse in the world for firing on an unarmed individual.

Exactly!

Why the "weapons at ready" approach? That's why I want to see what was in this officer's bloodstream that would make him so paranoid that he would
shoot an unarmed man with his hands above his head.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Love how this kid is now high on PCP at the time...

But we are the ones jumping to conclusions...

Yes, and they know this because the neighbor reported that he had jumped through the glass. There is no concept that he might have fallen or been
pushed through said opening, something the neighbor failed to notice.
Anyone who is a witness who upholds the story is automatically accepted and the worst case is automatically assumed, therefore because the neighbor
said he jumped, that suddenly becomes "evidence" to show that he was on hard drugs.

Even still, the fact of the matter is that the current situation isn't known by law enforcement. So long as the man is unarmed, and the officers have
backup on scene, there is no excuse in the world for firing on an unarmed individual.

Exactly!

Why the "weapons at ready" approach? That's why I want to see what was in this officer's bloodstream that would make him so paranoid that he would
shoot an unarmed man with his hands above his head.

Because no officer has ever been severely beaten or killed by an unarmed man...

Some of you need to realize what sort of world you live in. Police brutality is deplorable but when you start to paint every single incident as a
case of the cop using unjustifiable force, you turn into static that nobody cares about.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.